The Sacred Area of Early Bronze Megiddo: History and Interpretation

David Ussishkin

The sacred area at Tel Megiddo was first excavated by the Oriental Institute of the Univer- sity of Chicago in 1933–1938 and then by the Tel Aviv University expedition in 1992–2010. At present, readers studying the results have to find their way between four excavation reports, each of which is partial and sometimes contradicts the others, as well as in among various comple- mentary and critical studies. The primary aim of the present study is to present a comprehensive picture of the Megiddo sacred area and its history during the Early Bronze Age. As the excavated data are largely incomplete and open to different interpretations, emphasis will be put here on the author’s views and stratigraphic interpretations. Finally, the question of whether the sacred area in its various stages was part of a settlement or a pilgrimage site is discussed in detail.

Keywords: Megiddo; Palestinian archaeology; Pilgrimage sites; Early Bronze Age; cup marks

he unique sacred area at Tel Megiddo was first ex- XX–I, were discerned and defined in Megiddo by the cavated by the Oriental Institute of the University Oriental Institute team, the lowest one being Stratum of Chicago in 1933–1938 and then by the Tel Aviv XX, which represents the early remains uncovered on TUniversity expedition in 1992–2010. At present, readers bedrock in Area BB. studying the sacred area, its history, and development In 1992, systematic excavations were renewed in have to find their way through the labyrinth of four exca- ­Megiddo by the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv Uni- vation reports in Megiddo II–V, as well as through many versity in cooperation with several institutions in Israel studies on specific subjects or aspects of the excavations. and abroad. Extensive excavations in the sacred area, in In many cases, the reports and the various studies pres- continuation of Loud’s work in Area BB, were carried out ent contradictory views. The main aim of this study is to for 18 years between 1992 and 2010. The directors of the present a clear picture of the sacred area and its develop- expedition during this period were Israel Finkelstein, ment during the Early Bronze period, based on all the Baruch Halpern, and myself. The excavation field in the presently available data. sacred area has now been labeled Area J (Fig. 1). The The excavation of the sacred area by the Oriental In- digging in Area J was successively supervised by Aharon­ stitute, designated as Area BB, was carried out under the Sasson, Jennifer Peersmann, Martin Peilstöcker, and directorship of Gordon Loud (1948: 57–105, figs. 390– Matthew J. Adams. 406). Area BB included two parts: a deep trench on the In the renewed excavations, the stratigraphic sequence eastern slope of the mound where bedrock was reached, of each excavation field was labeled separately. The term and a wider trench on the summit in continuation of the “level” was used rather than “stratum,” and the levels were upper end of the deep trench, where the Early Bronze denoted in Arabic rather than Roman numerals in order temples were uncovered (Fig. 1). Twenty strata, labeled to avoid confusion with the stratigraphy of the Oriental Institute expedition. In each excavation field, the letter designating it was added as a prefix to the number of the level. In Area J—the excavation field of the sacred area— David Ussishkin: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv Univer- labeling started from the bottom, from the remains found sity, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel, [email protected] on bedrock. Hence, Level J-1 parallels Stratum XX, Levels

© 2015 American Schools of Oriental Research. BASOR 373 (2015): 69–104.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 70 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 1. A plan of Megiddo, showing Area BB and Area J. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

J-2 and J-3 parallel Stratum XIX, etc. The results of the the excavation area, that is, “J.” For the sake of clarity, this digging in Area J were fully published in the three final re- letter was omitted in the present paper (e.g., Wall 08/21 ports of the renewed excavations: the results of the 1992– rather than Wall 08/J/21). 1996 seasons in Megiddo III (Finkelstein and Ussishkin Naturally, as the data are largely incomplete and 2000a), those of the 1998–2000 seasons in Megiddo IV open to different interpretations, emphasis is put here (Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006), and those on my own views and interpretations, which in many of the 2002–2010 seasons in Megiddo V (Adams 2013a; instances differ from those of various colleagues, in par- Keinan 2013). ticular Finkelstein and Adams. Some of my views were Two technical notes should be added here. First, the presented in Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000b: 576–91; plans accompanying the text of this article were repro- Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern 2006: 843–47; Us- duced or adopted from the various excavation reports, sishkin 2013. and the grids shown therein are not uniform. The gen- For the convenience of the reader, the strata and eral grid of the renewed excavations follows the grid of temples discussed below are presented in Table 1. the Oriental Institute excavations, with two alterations: Finally, a word of caution must be added. Although ­Every square of 25 × 25 m was divided into squares of the excavations at the sacred area of Megiddo—that is, 5 × 5 m, and a new set of numbers and letters was intro- the summit and the eastern slope—were extensive and duced. In a large part of Area J, a “local” grid was used, large in scale, they were limited to a small part of the which fits the orientation of the monumental remains. large mound. Quite possibly, excavations in other parts Second, the loci and wall numbers marked in the reports of the site would have resulted in changes to the far- of the renewed excavations include the letter designating reaching conclusions based on our present knowledge.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 71

Table 1. The Cultic Compound in the Early Periods

Stratum Level Period Dates b.c.e.* Remarks XX J-1 Pottery Neolithic, 6000–3500 Settlement on eastern slope (?) Chalcolithic, Early Bronze IA XIX J-2 Early Bronze IB 3500–3000 Temple; Picture Pavement J-3 Temple 4050 XVIII J-4 Great Temple J-4a Great Temple reused after earthquake (?) Site deserted in Early Bronze II 3000–2800 XVII J-5 Early Bronze III 2800–2400 Round Altar 4017 XVI J-6 Round Altar, rebuilt XV J-7 Intermediate Bronze 2400–2000 Three Megaron Temples; Round Altar reused XIV J-8 Cult Room in Megaron Temple 4040; Round Altar reused

* Dates b.c.e. are approximate and arbitrary.

The Summit of the Mound— here at a similar distance from the peak situated beneath The Focus of Cultic Activity the Round Altar. It appears, therefore, that the origi- nal, nearly horizontal summit of the mound, being at When intensive human activity started at the Mound most about 50 × 50 m in size, covered an area of about of Megiddo in Pottery Neolithic B, the site differed in 2,000–2,500 m2. The highest point of the summit was in shape from the mound as we presently know it. Norma its center, and bare rock could be seen here and there Franklin and Peersmann conducted an in-depth study on the surface of the summit. The view from the sum- of the original shape of the mound and its development mit must have been breathtaking in almost all direc- during the different periods of its history. Based on tions. It included the Jezreel Valley, Mount Carmel, the their study—unfortunately never published—it seems hills of Lower Galilee, Mount Tabor, and Mount Gilboa. that the huge earthen ramparts of the Middle Bronze As noted by Aharon Kempinski (1989: 175, 177), the (MB) I–II and the accumulation of debris during several Muhraka, the peak of Mount Carmel where the Carmel- millennia of continuous settlement radically changed ite monastery stands today, traditionally associated with the original shape and appearance of Tel Megiddo. The the cult of Baʿal, could be seen from here. nearly horizontal summit of the mound was originally Two springs were situated at the bottom of the slope at small in area, with its highest point evidently being the an elevation about 25–30 m lower than the summit and very spot where Round Altar 4017 was later erected (see at a distance of about 300 m from it. The ʿEin el-Kubbi Fig. 1). Exposed bedrock beside the altar indicates that spring is on the northern side, and another spring (where the highest point was approximately at elevation 156.60 the water system was constructed in later periods) is on m (Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006: 31, fig. the western side (see Fig. 1). 3.4). It appears that from this spot, the nearly horizontal We can theorize that cultic activity started on the surface of the summit mildly inclined in all directions summit of Tel Megiddo at an early date, possibly al- for a distance of about 15–25 m. It was surrounded by ready in the Pottery Neolithic period when the eastern a relatively steep slope. On the eastern side, the slope slope was settled. The focus of this assumed cultic activ- proper started near the facade of Temple 4050 or even ity undoubtedly was in the center of the summit, at its along the center of the building (see Figs. 5, 10 below). highest point, where the Round Altar was later erected. On the northern side, the slope proper probably started During the Early Bronze (EB) IB, when several temples along the center of the sanctuary of the Great Temple were successively erected along the edge of the summit, (see Fig. 14 below). On the western side, it started near the summit proper apparently remained open ground. It the western edge of Megaron Temple 5269 (see Fig. 27 was demarcated—at least partly—by a wall, and it was— below). On the southern side, the slope proper started again at least partly—lime-plastered, with various flimsy beyond the southern edge of Area BB; we may guess installations constructed here. The main data indicating that, as on the other three sides, the slope proper started the situation of the summit in the EB IB are listed below.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 72 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 2. A topographical map of Tel ʿAi (et-Tell) (after Herzog 1997: fig. 3.15A).

The back wall of Stratum XIX/Level J-3 Temple 4050 perimposed lime-plastered floors, assigned to Levels J-2 (Wall 94/2) was ca. 3 m thick, much thicker than all other and J-3. Floors and small installations of Levels J-1, J-2, walls of the temple, and much thicker than is structur- J-3, and J-4 were reached in several soundings carried ally needed for its function as the back wall of the temple out across the hypothetical sacred area of the summit (see Figs. 5–6, 10 below). It apparently replaced the back, (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 35–38, 63–64; Fin- though thinner wall of the Level J-2 temple (see Fig. 8 kelstein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006: 31–36; Ad- below). Wall 94/2 extended from one side of Area BB to ams 2013a: 109). Significantly, the sounding beside the the other for about 28 m, but its edges were not reached Round Altar revealed a layer of animal bones on the within the excavated area. On its northern end, a kind of Level J-4 floor, indicating that extensive sacrificial activ- a projecting buttress was built. We can speculate that the ities had taken place at this spot long before the Round main purpose of this wall was to enclose the area of the Altar was erected (see Fig. 23 below; Finkelstein and summit, with the “buttress” being part of the gate to this Ussishkin 2000a: 64). theoretical enclosure. When the Stratum XVIII/Level J-4 It seems that, as in Tel Megiddo, there are other Early Great Temple was erected, Wall 96/23, possibly its back Bronze sites in which the peak of the ancient mound be- wall, demarcated the northern side of the summit (see came the focus of cultic activity during the early date of Figs. 14–15 below). the settlement (or even before), eventually resulting in A lime-plastered floor extended along the western the erection of a central sanctuary at this place. In Tel ʿAi side of the back wall (Wall 94/2) of Level J-3 Temple (et-Tell), the huge acropolis dominates the hill on which 4050. In 1938, it was exposed along the entire wall for a the Early Bronze city was erected (Fig. 2). The famous, distance of about 4–5 m from the wall (see Figs. 5–6 be- massive temple was built here on the summit at an early low). Soundings in the renewed excavations in the space stage of the settlement (Marquet-Krause 1949: pls. 89, between this wall and the Round Altar revealed two su- 92). “It is located at the highest point of the tell, com-

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 73

Fig. 3. A topographical map of Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun (after Genz 2002: fig. 1).

manding an unparalleled view of the Jordan Valley and some indications of cultic activity. I assume—although it the Dead Sea” (Callaway 1965: 31). Flimsy remains were cannot be proven—that cultic activity on the summit of uncovered on bedrock beneath the walls of the temple Tel Megiddo, associated with these early settlements, had (Callaway 1965: 31). We can assume that they repre- started already during these early periods, long before sent some activity on the summit, probably of cultic na- the earliest known temple was built in EB IB on the edge ture, possibly before the establishment of the settlement of the summit. proper. In Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun in northern Jordan, a The excavated evidence is as follows. Various small round altar and three temples crowned the summit of the installations, such as rock-cut and stone-built pits, rock fortified site near one of its gates (Fig. 3; Genz 2002: 94– cuttings, and small structures above bedrock which are 96, figs. 1–2; Ibrahim and Douglas 2004: 371–73, fig. 4). difficult to date were uncovered on the eastern slope by I venture to speculate that a similar situation exists at Tel Loud (1948: 59–61, fig. 390; also Dothan 1958) and in Jarmuth, where the acropolis dominates the Early Bronze soundings on the summit in the renewed excavations city (Fig. 4). Palatial buildings have been discovered in (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 35–38; Finkelstein, the lower parts of the mound, but not a central sanctu- Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006: 31–37). These remains ary. The acropolis was hardly touched in the excavations have been assigned to Stratum XX/Level J-1. (de Miroschedji 1997; 1998), and the suggestion that a Some Pottery Neolithic pottery and flint tools were central temple had been built here remains, at present, a uncovered by Loud on the eastern slope (e.g., Shipton theoretical possibility. 1939: pls. 18, 20; Loud 1948: pls. 2, 166); significantly, the head of a broken clay figurine of a female goddess, Stratum XX/Level J-1: The Beginnings of the type known in the Yarmukian culture, was found on the eastern slope, pointing to some cultic activity Settlement on the eastern slope of Tel Megiddo or (Loud 1948: pl. 241:1). parts of it (and possibly also in other parts of the mound) Some Chalcolithic-Ghassulian pottery was found by started in the Neolithic, Chalcolithic-Ghassulian, and EB Loud on the eastern slope. Noteworthy is a fragment of a IA periods. The remains from these times were assigned basalt bowl with a decorated rim (Loud 1948: pl. 262:3). to Stratum XX/Level J-1. The excavated data include Of particular interest are many broken cornets, some of

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 74 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 4. A topographical map of Tel Jarmuth (after de Miroschedji 1998: fig. 1). them beautifully decorated with red wash and painted well as the Picture Pavement date to EB IB. In order to fa- lines (e.g., Shipton 1939: pls. 15, 18; Loud 1948: pl. 96:11– cilitate our present discussion, the sanctuary of the Level 17). The cornets, typical Chalcolithic-Ghassulian vessels J-3 temple will be termed Temple 4050, although it forms shaped like modern ice cream cones, were apparently solely one wing of the Level J-3 temple complex. associated with cultic activities during this period (see To the earlier, Level J-2 temple belong the follow- below). ing remains (Fig. 7). A lime-plastered floor (extending Gray burnished pottery, apparently dating to EB IA, beneath the lime-plastered floor of the overlying Level indicates the existence of a settlement at Megiddo dur- J-3 temple) formed the floor of the sanctuary. Embed- ing this period (Engberg and Shipton 1934: 17–18; Joffe ded in it were two rows of flat stone slabs. One row 2000: 163; Braun 2014: 72–79). Nothing is known about contained three slabs; the second row contained two cultic activity at that time. slabs. However, we can safely restore another slab posi- tioned opposite the parallel slab in the other row. Three Stratum XIX (Earlier Part)/Level J-2: of the slabs had already been discovered by Loud, who The Earliest Temple mistakenly associated them with the overlying floor of Temple 4050 (Figs. 5–6). The brick-built and plastered In 1938, Loud uncovered Temple 4050 of Stratum XIX inner face of the southern side wall of the sanctuary, situated at the eastern edge of the summit and facing the which adjoined the southern side wall of the later Level eastern slope (Figs. 5–6; Loud 1948: 61–65, fig. 390). It J-3 temple side wall, was uncovered. The position of appeared to be the earliest temple built in the sacred area. the back western wall can be restored along the gap The famous Picture Pavement extending on the slope in in the Level J-2 lime-plastered floor beneath the thick front of the temple was assigned to it. Temple 4050 was back wall of Level J-3 Temple 4050 (Wall 94/2), a gap examined afresh in the renewed excavations (Finkelstein apparently representing the robber trench of the wall. and Ussishkin 2000a: 38–55). It is now established that The position of the front (eastern) wall of the temple the temple as uncovered and published by Loud in fact can probably be determined as well. The lime-plastered contains the remains of two superimposed temples, now floor of the Level J-2 temple extends beneath the over- assigned to Levels J-2 and J-3. Both of these temples as lying front (eastern) wall of the Level J-3 temple. A

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 75

Fig. 5. Stratum XIX Temple 4050 as published by Loud (1948: fig. 390). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

Fig. 6. Stratum XIX Temple 4050 in 1938, from the southeast (after Loud 1948: fig. 139). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 76 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 7. The remains of the Stratum XIX/Level J-2 temple. The contour of the overlying Temple 4050 is shown as well for the sake of clarity. (Cour- tesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) stone pavement extending at this elevation in front of Opposite the entrance and adjoining the back wall was and beneath the bottom of the Level J-3 eastern temple the altar. The space extending between the entrance and wall may well be the stone foundation of the Level J-2 the altar divided the sanctuary into two equal wings, each wall, the top (western) edge of the Picture Pavement, with six offering tables arranged in two rows. I assume or both. In any case, the line of the Level J-2 wall must that the earlier Level J-2 temple was based on a similar have extended here along the upper edge of the steep pattern. The preserved part of the building forms the left eastern slope of the mound. On the northern side, the (southern) wing of the sanctuary, with six stone slabs em- lime-plastered floor of Level J-2 extends beneath the bedded in the lime-plastered floor and arranged in two northern side wall of Level J-3 Temple 4050, indicating rows; by analogy to the later-in-date Temple 4050 and that on this side, the earlier temple was larger than the the Great Temple, these stone slabs, although relatively sanctuary of the later, overlying temple. small in size, have to be interpreted as small offering ta- It seems that based on the above remains and the bles rather than column bases. The entrance to the Level reconstructed plan of the later-in-date Stratum XVIII/ J-2 temple must have been on the eastern side, facing Level J-4 Great Temple (see Fig. 15 and text below), the the steep slope and the Picture Pavement. The entrance ground plan of the Level J-2 temple can be reconstructed and the altar, marking the dividing line between the two as follows (Fig. 8). The Great Temple had a broad-room temple wings, should be restored roughly near the north- sanctuary with an entrance in the center of the front wall. ern wall of the overlying Level J-3 Temple 4050. It fol-

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 77

Fig. 8. Hand-drawn sketch of the above plan illustrating the suggested reconstruction of the Stratum XIX/Level J-2 temple. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) lows that the inner length of the left (southern) wing was A paved courtyard known as the Picture Pavement about 15.5 m. The right (northern) parallel wing should was uncovered by Loud on the eastern slope in front of be restored farther to the north, extending beneath the the temple (Figs. 7–8, 26; Loud 1948: 61, 65; fig. 390). northern part of the Level J-3 temple building. Here, no The lower part of the Picture Pavement was examined remains of Level J-2 were preserved, as they had appar- afresh in the renewed excavations in 2008 (Keinan ently been completely eradicated by the builders of the 2013); however, in my view, this examination did not Level J-3 temple complex. Assuming that the northern change our understanding of the stratigraphy here. wing was identical in size to the southern one, it follows Four pavement segments were uncovered by Loud on that the northern edge of the edifice was situated at the the slope (Pavements 4008, 4064, 4118, and apparently a northern edge of Area BB, beneath the “buttress” at the segment beside and beneath the facade of Temple 4050). northern edge of Level J-3 Wall 94/2. According to this Two phases were found in Pavement 4008, both con- suggested reconstruction, the overall external measure- nected to a thick, curving wall which extends along the ments of the Level J-2 temple were about 33 × 8 m. northern side of Area BB (Wall 08/21). Most likely, all

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 78 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 9. A graffito from the Picture Pavement showing several human figures and a crisscross pattern. It is surrounded by a circle of small carved cavities (after Loud 1948: pl. 272). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago) four pavement segments formed parts of a large paved interpretations of the graffiti and their meaning have been courtyard that extended on the slope in front of the offered (see Beck 2002: 25–29). Kempinski suggested that Level J-2 temple. The curving wall was apparently the the graffiti “served a magical purpose” and “were meant to northern wall of the courtyard. Significantly, its location help the hunters to obtain a rich game-bag, or to prevent indicates that the assumed courtyard reached the north- wild animals from devouring the cattle, as well as for the ern end of the Level J-2 temple as restored above. On the purpose of black magic against human enemies” (1989: southern side, Segment 4064 of the Picture Pavement 170). Eveline Van der Steen assumes that the Megiddo reaches the southern edge of Area BB. We can assume temple was a tribal gathering place, and the graffiti form a that the edge of the courtyard on that side, like the edge collection of tribal symbols—expressions of tribal identity of the Level J-2 temple, was situated a short distance in relation to other tribes (2005: 14–16). Keinan believes beyond the edge of Area BB. The entrance to the temple that the graffiti portray clear connections with Egyptian courtyard was probably at its eastern end, at the lower art of the Pre-Dynastic period, perhaps also indicating an slope, from which one ascended along the pavement to Egyptian presence in Megiddo in the EB I period (2007). the temple proper. Yuval Yekutieli believes that the graffiti of the earlier “level” Various incised graffiti were discerned on the stone slabs portray Egyptian-style symbolic exhibitions of royal power, of the Picture Pavement (Fig. 9; Loud 1948: 61, pls. 271– which were erased by the later incisions (2008). 82). They were apparently engraved by people coming to the temple who passed by or gathered in its courtyard. Adi Stratum XIX (Later Part)/Level J-3: Keinan listed 56 incised slabs, 12 of which were discerned Temple 4050 in the renewed excavations (2013: 36–46). Sometimes new graffiti were engraved on earlier ones. The graffiti include As mentioned above, the Stratum XIX/Level J-3 clumsy illustrations of human figures, among them figures Temple 4050 was uncovered by Loud and studied afresh holding weapons and a musician holding a lyre. There are by us (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 38–55; 2000b: several horned animals and clumsy geometric patterns and 577–79). Significant studies were published before the engraved lines. Sometimes circles of small, round depres- renewed excavations by Immanuel Dunayevsky and sions were carved on the surface of the stone slabs. Various Kempinski (1973: 167–68) and by Claire Epstein (1973).

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 79

Fig. 10. The Stratum XIX/Level J-3 Temple 4050. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

For some unknown reason, the EB IB religious au- The sanctuary (Temple 4050) was 12.60 m long and thorities in Megiddo decided to replace the Level J-2 4.20 m wide (interior measurements). Significantly, the temple with a new shrine based on a somewhat different entrance and the altar that faced it were not situated in plan. The old temple was nearly completely demolished, the center of the sanctuary. Four roughly rectangular and its remains removed—apparently deliberately. The stone slabs were embedded in the floor along the central newly built temple building was almost as large as the axis of the sanctuary. As suggested by Adams, based on previous one (provided that my above reconstruction analogy to the Great Temple, these stone slabs must have is correct), but the sanctuary (Temple 4050) was much been offering tables rather than column bases. The four smaller, extending along part of the complex (Fig. 10). offering tables are symmetrically placed in the sanctuary, The back wall of the new temple (Wall 94/2) was much emphasizing the fact that the doorway and altar are situ- thicker than the other walls of the temple, and, as dis- ated asymmetrically off center. cussed above, it probably demarcated the sacred summit The units to the north of Temple 4050 formed a subject area. The mud bricks used for the construction of the of much debate and were studied afresh in the renewed new temple were made of mound debris, possibly debris excavations (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 49–50). from the demolished walls of the Level J-2 temple, and Dunayevsky and Kempinski (1973: 167–68) considered contained many EB I pottery sherds. Units 4047 and 4050 as two parallel shrines with a small

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 80 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373 storeroom situated between them. Epstein considered Unit 4047 as part of the temple complex, but not as an additional shrine (1973: 54). The remains of a square in- stallation, possibly an altar or a pedestal, were uncovered in Unit 4047. It is clear that Unit 4047 (together with the adjoining “storeroom”) formed an integral part of the Level J-3 temple complex, but whether this unit was a second sanctuary is unknown. Some cultic vessels, cor- nets, and a stone mace-head, which may have been kept in the “storeroom,” were uncovered in this general area (Loud 1948: pls. 3, 96, 270:2). A courtyard extended on the steep slope in front of the Level J-3 temple (Fig. 10). It was bounded by a thick mud-brick wall, which was preserved on the southern and part of the eastern sides. The preserved segments of the wall indicate that the courtyard was rectangular and extended along the entire facade of the temple complex. Significantly, it did not extend down the slope on the Fig. 11. Brick Circle 4034 in the courtyard of Temple 4050 (after Loud eastern side as far as the courtyard/Picture Pavement of 1948: fig. 148). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of the earlier Level J-2 temple. The entrance to the court- Chicago) yard was probably on the eastern side, opposite the en- trance to the sanctuary of Temple 4050. end of the 2010 season (Fig. 14; Finkelstein and Ussish- As argued by Epstein (1973: 55–56), Brick Circle 4034 kin 2000a: 54–67; Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann should be assigned to Temple 4050 (see Fig. 10). Built of 2006: 36–41; Adams 2013a: 50–71). For several reasons, mud bricks, it is 10 cm high and about 2.25 m in diameter the huge size of the Great Temple made it most difficult (Fig. 11; see also Fig. 20 below; Loud 1948: 66, figs. 148, to properly uncover and study. First, we were limited by 391). Although Loud first considered it to have belonged the edges of Area BB—reaching the remains of the Great to Stratum XIX, he eventually assigned it to Stratum Temple beyond Area BB meant digging first the accu- XVIII, as it was built above Segment 4118 of the Stratum mulated debris of all later strata. Second, we were deter- XIX Picture Pavement (see Figs. 7–8). However, once mined to preserve the walls of the later-in-date Megaron the Picture Pavement was ascertained to date to Level Temples extending atop the Great Temple. Third, we had J-2, it became clear that the overlying Brick Circle was to systematically refill many of our excavated trenches in in fact constructed in the courtyard of Level J-3 Temple order to protect the exposed remains from winter rains 4050. Naturally, it should be compared with the circular and erosion. Therefore, the huge edifice was uncovered installation in the courtyard of the Ghassulian temple at only partially, many of our conclusions are based on En-Gedi (see Fig. 21 below; Ussishkin 1980: 11, figs. 3–4; reconstructions, and various issues have remained un- pl. 4:2–3). The latter was about 3 m in diameter and built solved. The Great Temple has been summarized in Ad- of stone, and apparently originally contained a plastered ams, Finkelstein, and Ussishkin 2014. basin for water used in the cultic rites. Whether Brick The Great Temple was built at the edge of the sacred Circle 4034 also had a basin for water is unknown. Near summit, facing northeast, the entrance to its sanctuary this installation was found a unique ceremonial sword, apparently located near the top of the northern slope of about 57 cm long, made of copper, with its curved projec- the mound at that time. We can safely assume that a large tions near the tang covered with silver (Fig. 12); it was courtyard extended on the upper part of the steep slope found together with about 400 faience beads of the type in front of the edifice and its main entrance, as is the case with straight sides and several larger shell beads (Fig. 13; of the earlier Stratum XIX/Levels J-2–J-3 temples. The Loud 1948: pls. 207:1; 283:1). orientation of the entrance and of the shorter axis of the building is in line with the spring of ʿEin el-Kubbi, which Stratum XVIII/Level J-4: The Great Temple is situated at the bottom of the slope (see Fig. 1). Peers- mann and I believe that the position and orientation of the The walls of the Great Temple of Stratum XVIII/Level Great Temple are not accidental, and that the temple and J-4 were first encountered by Loud (1948: 66, figs. 150– its cult were associated with water and the adjacent spring. 51, 391). The edifice was then systematically investigated Based on the uncovered remains, the temple can during every season of the renewed excavations until the most probably be restored as a broad-room edifice, 47.5

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 81

Fig. 12. A ceremonial copper sword, about 57 cm long, found near Brick Circle 4034 (after Loud 1948: pl. 283:1). (Courtesy of the Oriental Insti- tute of the University of Chicago)

Fig. 13. Approximately 400 faience beads and several larger shell beads found near Brick Circle 4034 (after Loud 1948: pl. 207:1). (Cour- tesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

× 22.0 m in size (Fig. 15). It included the sanctuary and were no deep-set foundations and the bottom course two corridors extending at the back (Figs. 16–17). The of the walls was laid on the surface of the time. The reconstruction of the sanctuary as a rectangular hall of lower part of the walls was built of stones and the upper 40.0 × 9.0 m is based on the assumption that the entrance part of mud bricks. Large, roughly worked stones were and altar were situated at the center of the sanctuary and meticulously laid in the faces of the walls. Thick lay- that the two wings of the sanctuary were symmetrical. ers of clay separated the stone courses. The walls of the All the walls of the edifice were about 3.5 m thick. There sanctuary were white plastered. The floors were made

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 82 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 14. The uncovered remains of Stratum XVIII/Level J-4 Great Temple. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) of beaten earth. Plastered mud-brick benches extended of mud bricks and stones, and more than one stage was along the walls of the sanctuary or parts of them. A row discerned in its construction. of 10 stone slabs serving as column bases was situated Twelve huge offering tables cut of basalt stone ex- at the center of the sanctuary; the columns, structur- tended in two rows across the sanctuary, embedded in ally essential in supporting a roof that spanned a space the floor. Seven offering tables were completely or partly of 9 m, were almost certainly made of wood. The roof uncovered in the excavation, and the rest are recon- must have been made of wooden beams, tree branches, structed. Some of them were round and some roughly straw, and clay. rectangular. The round ones are beautifully dressed. The The doorway, ca. 3.5 m wide, faced the altar situated offering tables vary in size and weight; the largest round against the back wall. Thin basalt slabs paved the thresh- one is 1.61 m in diameter and nearly 1.50 ton in weight. old. One stone slab was identified as a door socket (Ad- A round, deep depression was cut in it, probably to hold ams 2013a: 59; Adams, Finkelstein, and Ussishkin 2014: liquids as part of the cultic activities in the temple. 290). However, considering the issue afresh, I believe that Two corridors extended along the back wall of the the identification is incorrect, as the so-called socket is sanctuary (Fig. 17). They opened to an additional, ex- too roughly carved. We can assume that proper doors terior corridor extending along the back of the build- were installed in the entrance, but no evidence for that ing (Loci 96/67 and 96/69 in Fig. 15). Significantly, was recovered in the excavation. The large altar was built the corridors could not be directly approached from

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 83

Fig. 15. A suggested reconstruction for Stratum XVIII/Level J-4 Great Temple. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

Fig. 16. The sanctuary of the Great Temple, from the north. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeol- ogy, Tel Aviv University)

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 84 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 17. A corridor of the Great Temple, from the west. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedi- tion, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) the ­sanctuary; a person standing in the sanctuary who The animal bones found in the Great Temple were wished to reach them had to exit the sanctuary by the studied by Paula Wapnish and Brian Hesse (2000). Large main entrance, walk around the edifice outside, enter concentrations of bones were found in each of the three the exterior corridor at the back, and from there enter the corridors where the sacrificial remains were dumped and corridor proper—a route of about 75 m or more! Accu- in the sanctuary. These were mostly young sheep and mulations of animal bones—remains of sacrifices—were goats, with less than 20% cattle. There were differences found in the corridors and point to their function in the in the refuse among the three corridors, possibly indi- cultic activities of the temple. cating different sacrificial procedures. As summarized by The reconstruction of the Great Temple suggested Adams, Finkelstein, and Ussishkin: here (see Fig. 15) is supported by the metrological anal- ysis carried out by Adams (Adams, Finkelstein, and Us- The western corridor contained notably more cut bones, sishkin 2014: 295–96, fig. 8). It appears that the plan of which suggests that these bones came from early stages of carcass processing. The eastern corridor contained the edifice is based on a 6-cubit module—the cubit being far more burned bones and more articulation, which in- 52.5 cm in length. This is the length of the Egyptian lon- dicates that these were “the remains from later stages of ger cubit known during later periods in Egypt and the Le- carcass processing and utilization, i.e., discards from meals vant. Significantly, according to this reconstruction, the and burned detritus” (Wapnish and Hesse 2000: 446). . . . altar is situated exactly in the center of the building at an The western corridor had lots of limbs but few heads, and equal distance from all four corners. However, one issue the eastern had large numbers of head fragments but few remains unsolved. This reconstruction leaves the exte- limbs. . . . This suggests that each of the favissae was used rior corridor at the back (Loci 96/67 and 96/69) and that as a deposit for sacral refuse resulting from different rituals on the western side (Locus 00/185) outside the building or different steps within a ritual. [The exterior corridor] proper. Indeed, the exterior wall of the exterior back cor- yielded a higher percentage of cow axial parts, while sheep/ ridor (Wall 96/23) is narrower than the other walls of the goat heads were notably absent. . . . In sum, the three corri- dors each specialized in different animal parts: the eastern edifice. But, on the other hand, the exterior corridor at corridor, crania mandibles, and teeth; the western, fore and the back was as wide as the corridors proper, and accu- hind limbs; the southern exterior, ribs and vertebrae. (Ad- mulations of animal bones of similar nature were found ams, Finkelstein, and Ussishkin 2014: 298) inside. It seems that both exterior corridors must have formed part of the temple, maybe serving as a kind of It is noteworthy that Wapnish and Hesse also identified annex. in the temple one lion bone, one wolf bone, one bone

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 85

Fig. 18. The Great Temple: a line of cracks in Wall 96/1, probably the result of an earthquake. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Ex- pedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) apparently of a panther, and three large carnivore bones Rosen, long cracks run through a few of the stones which which could not be identified (2000: 432–33)! were neatly placed along the face of the wall at the top of The end of the Great Temple is of much interest, as it the stone substructure (Fig. 18). Secondly, the northern may reflect the reasons for the end of the EB I settlements face of Wall 96/1 shows at one place in its eastern part a in the entire region, briefly mentioned below. With the nearly vertical crack; the segment of the wall from this exception of some pottery and animal bones, the Great point eastward tilts down toward the slope of the mound, Temple was practically devoid of finds. No traces indi- probably as a result of an earthquake. cating destruction by fire have been detected. An exam- ination of the building led the geologists Shmuel Marco Stratum XVIII/Level J-4a: The Great and Amotz Agnon, as well as Finkelstein and me (Marco Temple (Secondary Phase) et al. 2006; Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006: 49–50; Finkelstein 2013: 1331)—but not Adams (2013a: At the time, based on the interpretation of the strati- 79–82)—to the conclusion that a strong earthquake graphical evidence, we concluded that following the must have shattered the edifice. Megiddo is located on above-discussed, assumed earthquake, the damaged the ­Carmel Fault Zone and is therefore vulnerable to temple building was partly repaired and reused (Level seismic activity. According to Yael Braun and others (see J-4a) (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 65–67; Finkel- Y. Braun in Braun 2014: 51), the possibility that the Great stein, Ussishkin, and Peersmann 2006: 50–52). Evidence Temple suffered from an earthquake is supported by geo- of repair was observed in the corridors, and a second- logical evidence of a seismic event or series of events that ary floor was discerned in the sanctuary and in Corridor affected the whole region at about the same time. 94/81 (Figs. 14, 15). Two significant pieces of evidence, which in my view Recently, Adams presented strong arguments against support the “earthquake concept,” have been observed this hypothesis. He concluded that the temple was not in those segments of the temple walls in which the stone repaired and that only a single floor could be detected substructure was preserved. As first observed by Arlene in the sanctuary (2013a: 74–79). Relying on the study

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 86 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373 of David Friesem and Ruth Shahack-Gross (2013), he Ornit Ilan and Goren as well dated the vessels of the considered the secondary floor as “phytolith lens repre- cache to EB IB (2003). Adams believes that this was a senting collapse and sporadic activity,” which included foundation deposit of the Stratum XV/Level J-7 Temple “numerous ephemeral hearths” (Adams 2013a: 74). 4040 dated to the Intermediate Bronze period (Adams, Thus, Adams defined Level J-4a as a period of crisis Finkelstein, and Ussishkin 2014: 295). and abandonment during which continued sporadic The cache of pottery in Egyptian style remains enig- use took place in the temple. In other words, while de- matic. It is not clear what the function and use of the nying the existence of a secondary level in the temple, vessels were and what stands behind their Egyptian char- Adams, using different terminology, in fact describes acter. In my view, these vessels were placed in the corri- the same thing. dor of the Great Temple during its period of reuse (Level Most interesting is the discovery of four or five owl J-4a). Quite possibly, they were placed in a shallow pit pellets in the apparently disused edifice, in the sanctu- cut in the floor when the temple was abandoned at the ary and the corridors (Wapnish and Hesse 2000: 444–45; end of EB IB. Adams 2013a: 74). As Wapnish and Hesse explain, The Question of Building 4113 owls . . . typically return to a nesting site to consume their prey, which they swallow whole. After the soft tis- Building 4113 is hardly described by Loud (Fig. 20; sue is digested they vomit up a bolus of the undigested Loud 1948: figs. 156, 391). Its thick stone walls indicate skin and bones. The skin disintegrates but the bones re- that it was a massive building of a public nature, and its main. . . . [The pellets in the corridors included bones of] plan and position on the eastern slope hint that its facade smaller mole rat . . . cricetids, such as hamsters, gerbils was on the eastern side. Its floor was not preserved. The and voles . . . rats and mice . . . [and] several sizes of frog and lizard. . . . Such accumulations may indicate that building lies above Stratum XIX/Level J-3 Temple 4050 the site of collection was not trafficked for a period of and beneath walls of Stratum XVII/Level J-5 Palace 3177. time. . . . [It] was a place little used, or even deserted, Therefore, quite possibly Building 4113 was contemporary when the owls were there. Surrounding areas outside the with the Great Temple. The layout of the preserved walls structure could have been places of diminished activity makes it possible to reconstruct here a small broad-room as well. (2000: 444–45) temple built above the disused Temple 4050, as suggested by Dunayevsky and Kempinski (1973: 168–69), Amnon The Cache of Pottery in Egyptian Style Ben-Tor (1973: 94, 96), and Maura Sala (2007: 96–98). In that case, Building 4113 replaced Temple 4050, and While digging the corridor near the southeast cor- Stratum XVIII/Level J-4 had in fact two contemporane- ner of the Great Temple, a concentration of broken pot- ous temples—a larger one facing the northern slope, and a tery vessels was discovered in one limited spot. Sixteen smaller one facing the eastern slope. vessels could be restored (Fig. 19). The stratigraphic sit- The Great Temple was apparently finally abandoned uation of the cache is somewhat ambiguous. The broken at the end of EB IB. It seems that there was a gap in activ- vessels were concentrated in a limited area in the corri- ity in the cultic compound during EB II (Finkelstein and dor which was rebuilt or repaired in its secondary period Ussishkin 2000b: 585–86). Hence, it is difficult to ac- of use. They were found packed within an accumulation cept the views of Lorenzo Nigro (2010: 335–37) and Sala ca. 30 cm deep. A proper floor or the outline of a pit (2007: 110–13, 305), who date the Great Temple to EB II. in which the vessels could have been laid was not dis- cerned at this spot. Stratigraphically, the cache could also Summary of EB IB: Strata XIX–XVIII/ have belonged to the overlying Megaron Temple 4040 of Levels J-2–J-4 Temples Stratum XV/Level J-7 (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000a: 66–67; 2003). The EB IB was a period of intense religious activity Typologically, the vessels are homogeneous. They in Megiddo. Three temples were successively built in are all made in Egyptian forms and style. Yuval Goren the cultic compound, the second one replacing the first, concluded that they were locally produced, probably in and the third one replacing the second and serving until northern Israel (2000). Significantly, the potter followed the end of the period. These three temples have many Egyptian techniques, in particular the admixture of large features in common—in their setting, architecture, and quantities of chaff, which is rare in local pottery but com- function. As first observed by Kempinski (1972), many mon in Egyptian wares. Alexander Joffe was inclined to features show unmistakable resemblance to the Chalco- date the vessels to the EB IB, although he did not rule out lithic-Ghassulian temple at En-Gedi (Fig. 21; Ussishkin the possibility that they date to EB III (2000: 170–75). 1980; 2014). The following aspects should be emphasized.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 87

Fig. 19. A cache of Egyptian-style pottery vessels from the Great Temple (?). (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

Setting. The En-Gedi temple is situated on a project- additional benches or offering tables were erected in its ing rock-terrace, a short distance from and above the En- center, flanking the altar. A large number of pits or favis- Gedi spring. The spring is located at mid-height on the sae were dug into the natural soil at the two ends of the face of a nearly vertical cliff, which runs parallel to the sanctuary. The remains of the cultic offerings brought western side of the Dead Sea. The site possesses a breath- to the temple were thrown here, including about 200 taking view of the valley and the lake beyond. The main broken cornets. entrance to the temple is situated at the upper end of the As in the En-Gedi temple, the sanctuary in the three slope between the spring and the rock terrace. Likewise, Megiddo temples is a broad-room hall, and in two of the three Megiddo temples are built along the upper end them the entrance is situated in the center of the front of the slope, facing a magnificent view of the Jezreel Val- wall of the sanctuary. The altar that adjoins the back wall ley and Mount Carmel. is situated opposite the entrance. Inexplicably, in the Stratum XIX/Level J-3 temple, the entrance and the altar Architecture of the Sanctuary. The En-Gedi sacred that faces it are situated off center in the sanctuary. As in complex contained four structures connected to one the En-Gedi temple, rows of offering tables, or benches another by a stone fence, which enclosed a central serving the same purpose, extended along the sides and courtyard (Fig. 21). The sanctuary was a rectangular center of the sanctuary in the Megiddo temples. hall, measuring on the exterior 19.7 × 5.2–5.5 m. The entrance was at the center of the long wall. A semicir- Water Cult. In En-Gedi, the temple cult was associ- cular altar was situated opposite the entrance. Stone ated with the nearby spring. The main entrance to the benches extended along the walls of the sanctuary, and temple compound faced the En-Gedi spring. A circular

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 88 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 20. Building 4113 and Brick Circle 4034 as published by Loud in the plan of Stratum XVIII (after Loud 1948: fig. 391). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

cultic installation was built opposite the entrance to the discerned in the En-Gedi oasis, the only exception be- sanctuary, and a round basin, its sides made of verti- ing a cave on the lower slope beneath the spring. Sig- cally placed stone blocks, was constructed in the center nificant Chalcolithic-Ghassulian remains, however, were of the installation. I believe that the basin was originally uncovered in the Judaean Desert and its caves. It is clear, plastered and was used to hold water from the En-Gedi therefore, that the temple served as a place for pilgrim- spring. A round installation, possibly having a similar age from nearby as well as faraway regions, including for function, was built opposite the entrance of the sanctu- nomadic tribes. ary in the Stratum XIX/Level J-3 temple. The entrance of Rami Arav has recently suggested that in the study of the Great Temple was oriented toward ʿEin el-Kubbi, and the En-Gedi temple, as well as of other temples that served I assume that this was not accidental. as pilgrimage sites, scholars should employ methods used in the discipline of the anthropology of pilgrimage (2014; Use of Cornets. Cornets were used in the cultic ac- see Morinis 1991: 1–28). Based on Arav’s study, I wish to tivities in the En-Gedi temple. Many cornets—more elaborate on one point: the two doorways of the En-Gedi accurately, their broken stems, which are easy to recog- sacred compound. As Arav explained, “there was a linear nize—were found in the renewed excavations when the route within the sacred space, which carries a significant temples of Strata XIX–XVIII/Levels J-2–J-4 were exca- symbolic meaning. . . . The pilgrims . . . are not supposed vated. These cornets were not found in situ, and many to retrace their tracks and never go back by the way they were uncovered in the mud-brick debris accumulated entered. Retracing tracks would signify dissatisfaction, in the temples. Joffe raised the possibility that cornets discontent, regret and shame, not about their wrongdo- decorated in EB IB style date to this period (2000: 165); ings, but about visiting the sacred place” (2014: 29). The if that is correct, it follows that cornets were also in use two doorways of the En-Gedi temple radically differ from in Megiddo in the EB IB temples. each other. The elaborate one facing the En-Gedi spring obviously served as the main entrance used for entering Pilgrimage Site. The En-Gedi temple was an isolated the temple compound: the pilgrim ascended the slope at a public structure, with no signs of contemporary settle- point directly above the spring in order to reach the outer ment or activity remains in its immediate vicinity. Hardly entrance, which could be closed by a door. Inside the gate- any Ghassulian remains other than the temple have been house were benches on which the pilgrims sat. The second

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 89

Fig. 21. The Chalcolithic-Ghassulian temple at En-Gedi (after Ussishkin 1980: fig. 3). (Courtesy of the Israel Exploration Society) doorway, obviously used for leaving the compound, was a conducted by the Megiddo Expedition in the Jezreel simple structure located at the back side of the compound, Valley revealed an extensive settlement in this region and it could not be closed by a door. during EB IB (Finkelstein et al. 2006). We concluded In Megiddo, no contemporary EB IB settlement, or at the time that “Megiddo was the largest and probably secular buildings such as a ruler’s palace, was uncov- the most elaborate settlement of the EB IB system in ered on the summit of the tell. There are no grounds to the western valley” (Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Hal- the theory that the acropolis of the settlement was built pern 2006: 844). Raphael Greenberg believes that in EB here. It appears that, as in En-Gedi, the EB IB temples in IB, Megiddo served as “an important cultic center for a the sacred area should be considered as pilgrimage sites. large, pastorally oriented village population . . . a focus We can speculate that each complex had two entrances of regional interaction between loosely related village as in the En-Gedi temple, one for entering and one for and pastoral communities” (2003: 17, 19). Van der Steen departing. suggested that the temples had been a gathering center It seems that the Megiddo sacred area served a large for a confederation of nomadic tribes that were engaged population during EB IB. A vast area to the east and in long-distance trade (2001; 2005), but this seems less northeast of the mound was sparsely settled in that as likely. well as earlier periods (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000b: The change from EB I to EB II marked the end of the 582–83; Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern 2006: prosperous EB I settlement in the western part of the Jez- 843–46). Excavations recently carried out by Adams reel Valley as well as the end of the pilgrimage site on the substantiated the conclusion that an EB IB settlement summit of Tel Megiddo. The site was abandoned for a con- existed here (Adams et al. 2014). The regional survey siderable period of time. It is not clear what caused the end

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 90 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 22. A plan of Stratum XVI/Level J-6 remains. Note Adams’s suggested reconstruction of a temple in Locus 5221. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

of the prosperous EB I settlement in the region. It seems of Round Altar 4017 at the highest point of the summit possible that it was largely or partly caused by the massive (Figs. 22–23). The Round Altar has three stages in its earthquake that, apparently, shook the Level J-4 temple. history. First, in Stratum XVII/Level J-5, the altar was erected, and a stone fence demarcated a narrow court- Strata XVII–XVI/Levels J-5–J-6: The Round yard around it. Next, in Stratum XVI/Level J-6, the round Altar and Surrounding Settlement altar was demolished nearly to its foundation, and a new altar, somewhat smaller in diameter, replaced it. The The summit of Tel Megiddo was resettled in Strata stone fence was also rebuilt. Finally, in Strata XV–XIV/ XVII–XVI/Levels J-5–J-6 dated to EB III (Loud 1948: Levels J-7–J-8, the stone fence was rebuilt; at that time, 70–78, figs. 392–93; Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Peers- the back wall of the newly built Megaron Temple 4040 mann 2006: 52; Adams 2013a: 85–94, 111–18). The char- (see below) formed part of the fence and demarcated the acter of the place radically changed. Instead of a sacred courtyard of the altar on the northern side. area or cultic compound made of temples and an open Seven stone steps led to the altar (at least in its last stage), area on the summit associated with cultic activities, this and numerous cup marks were cut into them (Fig. 24). part of the mound was now filled with buildings, appar- Cup marks of that type of different sizes are typical of cultic ently of a secular nature (Fig. 22). Most prominent was sites in different periods. Indeed, cup marks were cut in the a large public building, Palace 3177, possibly the ruler’s rock near the En-Gedi spring, and almost certainly were palace, built on the slope. The newly built buildings also associated with the cultic activities in the En-Gedi temple extended above the desolate ruins of the Great Temple. discussed above (see Ussishkin 1980: 35–36, pl. 11:2). Many walls of this deserted edifice were now robbed of Significantly, a temple proper has not been discovered their stones—a clear sign of the new settlers’ disregard of in Strata XVII–XVI/Level J-5–J-6. Adams theorized that the old shrine and the sacred area. Quite possibly, other a temple was built to the west of the Round Altar but unexcavated parts of the site were settled as well. did not survive (Locus 5221 in Fig. 22; Adams 2013a: However, the deeply set, old tradition of cultic activ- 94, 117, fig. 2.73); this suggestion seems to me unlikely. ity in the sacred area found expression in the erection There is a possibility that a temple of these strata is situ-

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 91

Fig. 23. A view of Strata XVI–XV/Levels J-6–J-7 from 1998 featuring the Round Altar, from the southeast. Note the sounding in the foreground, showing the Level J-4 floor strewn with animal bones. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

ated to the south of Area BB, in the unexcavated part outside of Wall 4045 (Fig. 25). These were later covered of the summit. However, in my view, the Round Altar when Wall 4045B was added. was the sole cultic structure in the sacred area during Loud assigned Walls 4045 and 4045A to Stratum XVIII these strata, when secular buildings, possibly forming the and considered them as part of the fortification system acropolis of the EB III city, were built here. of the city. He interpreted Wall 4045A as a segment of a citadel wall or a gate. The domestic houses adjoining the Wall 4045—the So-Called City Wall façade of Wall 4045 were assigned to the same phase. In of Stratum XVIII his view, Wall 4045B was added in Stratum XVII, cover- ing the domestic houses. At the time of Strata XVII–XVI, A massive stone wall was uncovered by Loud at the this set of walls served as a massive retaining wall for the lower part of Area BB (Figs. 22, 25–26; Loud 1948: 64– fill upon which buildings of these strata were built. 70; figs. 391–92). The wall included three parts: (1) Wall Kathleen Kenyon interpreted the system in a different 4045, about 4–5 m thick and preserved to a height of way: Wall 4045 was built in EB III (her Phase D) as a ter- about 4 m, which crossed Area BB roughly from north to race to support the fill of the platform upon which Palace south in parallel with the contour of the mound; (2) Wall 3177 of Stratum XVII was constructed (1958: 53*–55*). 4045A, the segment of Wall 4045 at the southern edge of Wall 4045B was built later to add extra support to the sys- Area BB that made a sharp turn to the west; and (3) Wall tem. Fredric Brandfon considered the domestic houses 4045B, which was added later to Wall 4045 as a support bordering the facade of Wall 4045 as belonging to an along its exterior (eastern side). Once added together, the unwalled EB II settlement (1977). He understood Wall overall thickness of Wall 4045/4045B became about 8 m 4045 as a fortification element built in EB III, destroying wide. A row of domestic houses was built adjoining the the earlier domestic houses. Douglas Esse attributed the

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 92 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 24. Cup marks carved on the surface of the stone steps of Round Altar. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

construction of Wall 4045 to Strata XVII–XVI of EB III amazing amount of earth debris in the interior of the and interpreted it as a terrace wall supporting the fill on wall—far more than one would judge from the clean which Palace 3177 was based (1991). neatly made surfaces” (February 16, 1938); and: “Final Finkelstein first believed that Wall 4045/4045A was demolition of the city wall in full force. . . .The longer sec- built as a freestanding city or temenos wall in Stratum tion which has been coming away today is as full of earth XVIII (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000b: 581). Finkel- rubbish as was the upper part. It is really astonishing to stein and Adams have recently argued that Wall 4045 was find such poor structure between such splendid faces” a terrace wall of Stratum XVIII, part of the ambitious (February 21, 1938). construction project associated with the Great Temple It is generally agreed that Wall 4045/4045A/4045B (Adams 2013a: 72–73; Adams, Finkelstein, and Ussish- in Strata XVII–XVI served as a terrace wall for Palace kin 2014: 292). 3177. Three arguments support the view that it did not In my view, Wall 4045/4045A/4045B should be inter- originate as a city wall in Stratum XVIII: (1) The orien- preted according to the suggestions of Kenyon and Esse. tation of Wall 4045A does not follow the topographical There is no connection between the cultic area of the contour of the site, nor does its line make any sense topo- Great Temple of Level J-4 and the massive walls uncov- graphically. (2) Domestic structures are attached to the ered down the slope as suggested by Adams and Finkel- outside of Wall 4045, a feature that would be natural if stein, and the steep grade of the slope makes it doubtful Wall 4045 was a terrace wall, but unacceptable if it was whether monumental walls could have connected the a fortification wall. (3) Wall 4045 was preserved to an two areas. There is indeed some resemblance in con- unusual height, despite having been clumsily constructed struction style between the walls of the Great Temple (Fig. 26). If indeed Wall 4045 originated as a city wall and Wall 4045, as noted by Loud and Finkelstein, but in Stratum XVIII, it follows that it stood as a freestand- this proves neither their contemporaneity nor that these ing wall for hundreds of years, also during the period of walls belonged to a single complex. While the walls of the abandonment in EB II, before being reused as a terrace Great Temple are neatly built, and their cores are made wall; this seems unlikely. In summary, we can safely as- of fairly large, meticulously placed boulders, the core of sume that Wall 4045 was supported on the inside by a fill Wall 4045 contains a large amount of soil, as noted by from the day of its construction. As described by Esse, Loud in his field diary: “The city wall stripped of about the fill contained EB III pottery, indicating that it was not half its height and ready for cleaning up. . . . There is an laid before Stratum XVII.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 93

Fig. 25. Wall 4045 in 1938 with adjoining structures to the left, from the northwest (after Loud 1948: fig. 152). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

Stratum XV/Level J-7: The Megaron mental gatehouse leading to it solely on the summit. As Temples and the Round Altar Adams expressed:

Stratum XV/Level J-7 includes Round Altar 4017, the The transition . . . marks a significant change. . . . All three so-called Megaron Temples, and Building 3160 architecture on the site was levelled to make way for a (Fig. 27; Loud 1948: 78–84, fig. 394). Significantly, no completely new type of construction. . . . The architec- tural chronology suggests that the transition was abrupt additional structures were built at that time in the sacred and total. . . . The transition is not one of gradual evolu- area on the summit or on the eastern slope. tion of the town. . . . Rather, it is a sign of a complete The continued use of Round Altar 4017 emphasizes reorganization of political and religious structure and a the continuation of cultic traditions from Strata XVII– major cultural transition. (Adams 2013a: 95) XVI/Levels J-5–J-6 to Stratum XV/Level J-7. Nonethe- less, the change from Strata XVII–XVI/Levels J-5–J-6 The Round Altar in its third phase continued with- was drastic. Instead of a palace, a street, and many out change from Stratum XVI. As mentioned above, a buildings, with cultic structures limited to the Round new stone fence was built around the altar, except on the Altar, we now observe a cultic complex and a monu- northern side, where the back wall of Megaron Temple

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 94 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 26. Wall 4045 of Stratum XVII(?)/Level J-5(?) in 1938, from the northwest. Note the Picture Pavement of the Stratum XIX/ Level J-2 temple in the foreground (after Loud 1948: fig. 154). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

Fig. 27. The Round Altar, the Megaron Temples, and Building 3160 in Stratum XV/Level J-7, as published by Loud (1948: fig. 394). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 95

4040 demarcated the narrow courtyard surrounding the that the three Megaron Temples were concurrently built altar. Many animal bones were uncovered in the debris (2013a: 95–96, 118), and I am inclined to adopt this view. surrounding the altar—evidence of the sacrificial activ- Finally, we have to mention Building 3160 situated on ities during the latter period of its use. the eastern slope (Figs. 27–29). It contains two monu- The three Megaron Temples are similar, but not iden- mental staircases, and, as suggested by Loud, it must have tical in plan and dimensions (Fig. 27). Significantly, the been a gatehouse leading up the slope from the east to orientation of Temple 4040 differs from that of the two the sacred area. A massive retaining wall (Wall 4114) ex- western temples. Each temple had an entrance porch tended between the gatehouse and the sacred summit, with a portico and behind it a rectangular sanctuary. helping to terrace the steeply inclined ground. The entrance portico, flanked by two antae, contained The next question concerns the date of the Megaron two columns. The sanctuary had an altar adjacent to the Temples. Geoffrey Shipton and Loud assigned Stratum back wall, and its roof was supported by two centrally XV to the Intermediate Bronze period (Shipton 1939: placed columns. A side room was apparently built adja- 33–35; Loud 1948: 5). Kenyon supported this date (1958: cent to the side wall of the sanctuary. The western temple 56*–58*). Kempinski dated the temples to the EB III pe- (Temple 5269) was situated on the western slope of the riod (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 172–75, fig. 9; summit; hence, its foundations were raised in order to Kempinski 1989: 10, 175–77), and this dating is generally bring it level with the other temples. Quite possibly, the accepted today (e.g., Mazar 1990: 125–26; de Miroschedji construction of Temple 5269 was not completed. The 2001: 482–83; Sala 2007: 219–40, 306). The date is first northwest part of this temple was studied in the renewed and foremost based on the generally accepted notion that excavations, but little new information on it was added such monumental temples should be assigned to EB III, (Adams 2013a: fig. 2.56). Segments of a thick wall ex- a period marked by intensive urbanization, rather than tending behind Temples 5192 and 5269 and parallel to to the Intermediate Bronze, a period characterized in their back walls are probably the remains of a wall that the entire country by deterioration or abandonment of enclosed the sacred area. the urban centers. In our expedition, Finkelstein follows The wooden columns of the sanctuary in all three Kempinski in dating the construction of the temples to temples rested on round bases of hard limestone; all the EB III (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000b: 590; Finkel- bases are beautifully carved and their surfaces smoothed, stein 2013: 1332–33), while Halpern and I, recently fol- but they are not identical in size. A stone column base, lowed by Adams (2013b: 328–30), adopt a later date in similar in shape and style but smaller in size, was found the Intermediate Bronze period (Finkelstein and Ussish- in situ in Stratum XVI Palace 3177 (Loud 1948: 76, figs. kin 2000b: 590–91; Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern 174, 393). It therefore seems that the column bases in 2006: 847). the later-in-date Megaron Temples are in secondary use, In my view, four data support the dating of the temples removed from their original position in disused Palace to the Intermediate Bronze period. 3177 or a similar contemporary edifice. An important problem concerning the Megaron 1. Substantial earlier strata (Strata XVII–XVI/Levels Temples is whether they were all built at the same time. J-5–J-6), both containing Khirbet Kerak Ware, repre- Loud assigned all of them to the same stratum (1948: sent the EB III, the last prosperous sub-period of the 78–84; fig. 394). Kenyon believed that the western wall Early Bronze. It seems unlikely that at the very end of of Temple 4040 cut into the plaster floor extending in the Early Bronze, when urban life in the country was front of Temple 5192 (1958: 55*)—hence the conclusion already in sharp decline, the sacred area on the sum- that Megaron Temples 5192 and 5269 were built first and mit of Tel Megiddo would be drastically changed and Megaron Temple 4040 was added later. Dunayevsky and rebuilt on a grand scale. Kempinski conducted a small probe near the corner of 2. All three temples were clumsily built, showing infe- Megaron Temple 4040 and concluded that a wall segment rior construction style compared with earlier build- that they labeled “Wall A” was contemporary with the wall ings in the sacred area. This is evident in particular at of Temple 4040 but underlay Temple 5192 (1973: 165). Temple 4040; the eastern wall of the edifice is made Thus, they concluded that Temple 4040 was earlier than of stone blocks hardly fitting one another, laid on the the other two temples. This was supported by Esse (1991: surface of the time without any foundations (Fig. 30). 82–90) and de Miroschedji (2001: 483). The stratigraphy of The southern wall of this temple is clumsily based in “Wall A” was examined afresh in the renewed excavations, part on the earlier Stratum XVI stone fence of the but we found it impossible to establish a stratigraphic rela- Round Altar courtyard. tionship between this wall and the two temples. Adams be- 3. Very large and heavy stone boulders were incorpo- lieves, based on the layout of the underlying Stratum XVI, rated in the structures of the temples, a reminder of

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 96 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Fig. 28. A view of Stratum XV/Level J-7: Building 3160, from the south (after Loud 1948: fig. 187). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

Fig. 29. Stratum XV/Level J-7: Building 3160, from the northeast (after Loud 1948: fig. 188). (Courtesy of the Oriental Insti- tute of the University of Chicago)

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 97

Fig. 30. The eastern wall of Megaron Temple 4040 in 1994, from the east. (Photo by P. Shrago; courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

Fig. 31. Moving the stone pillar base of the entrance portico at Megaron Temple 4040 in 2010. (Courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University)

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 98 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

­megalithic architecture which is well known in the (of northern Syria) around 2450 b.c.e., or at the very end of Intermediate Bronze period. The eastern column EB III, about 2500–2450 b.c.e. (2010: 144–47). base of the entrance portico of Temple 4040 is a case It is difficult to establish how long Stratum XV lasted. It in point; its weight was estimated as 2.50 tons, and it seems that it was of relatively short duration. It appears that took a great effort in our excavation to move it aside the construction of Temple 5269 was not even completed. in order to enable digging beneath it (Fig. 31; Adams There are no indications of a long use, such as small changes 2013a: 96). in the structures, accumulations of debris layers, etc. 4. Pottery fragments associated with the construction The short history of the cultic compound during Stra- phase of Temple 4040 date to the very end of the EB III tum XV can be summarized as follows: During the EB III and to the Intermediate Bronze period (Adams 2013b: in Strata XVII–XVI/Levels J-5–J-6, the area of the sum- 328–30; but see also Finkelstein 2013: 1332–33). mit of the mound became part of the settlement proper, perhaps part of its acropolis. Cultic activities were lim- Three limestone mace-heads were found on the floor ited to the area of the Round Altar. In Stratum XV, the of Temple 4040 (Loud 1948: pl. 270:8–10). Finkelstein picture radically changed, and the summit once again argued that stone mace-heads are not known from the served as a sacred area, possibly a cultic compound in Intermediate Bronze-period contexts (2013: 1332–33). unsettled surroundings. It seems that the change from They appear, however, in Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Stratum XVI/Level J-6 to Stratum XV/Level J-7 marked cultic contexts (see catalog in Sebbane 2009). But, as no a return to the concept of a cultic summit without settle- temples dating to the Intermediate Bronze period are ment buildings surrounding it, as extant during the EB IB known to date, no data for comparison are available. We in Strata XIX–XVIII/Levels J-2–J-4. The entrance to the can assume that the presence of stone mace-heads in sacred area must have been through Building 3160. Here Temple 4040 is due to continuation of the Early Bronze again, we should apply the above-discussed principles cultic traditions in the Intermediate Bronze period. of the anthropology of pilgrimage as described by Arav The best comparison with the cultic compound of Stra- (2014) in connection with the Chalcolithic-Ghassulian tum XV/Level J-7 comes from Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun (see En-Gedi temple. These principles explain the presence of Fig. 3; Genz 2002: 94–96, figs. 1–2; Ibrahim and Doug- two staircases, i.e., two entrances in Building 3160, one las 2004: 371–73, fig. 3). As mentioned before, the cultic for entering the cultic compound and one for leaving it. zone in Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun was located at the summit of Significantly, the staircase on the northern side is wider the site, near one of the gates of the fortified settlement. than the one on the southern side of the building. We can Crowning this zone was a large, round altar—the only speculate that the wider staircase was used for entering known comparison to the Round Altar at Megiddo. A few the cultic compound and the narrower one for leaving it. steps, facing east, led to the top of the altar, as at Megiddo. I will not elaborate here on the nature of the no- Three temples of the temples in antis-type faced the altar. madic population and tribal organization that was as- Based on pottery, the Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun settlement and sociated with the sacred area of Stratum XV. Suffice it cultic zone date to the EB III; therefore, in my view, the to say that the multi-chambered rock-cut tombs, labeled round altar in Megiddo that was first constructed in Stra- “shaft tombs,” that were uncovered by P. L. O. Guy on tum XVII is contemporary with the round altar at Khirbet the southeastern slope (e.g., Guy 1938: 135–37; Green- ez-Zeiraqun. The Megiddo Megaron Temples are appar- hut 1995: 12–15 [Type F Tombs]) show clear northern ently later in date, and, in my view, their resemblance to the affinities (e.g., Oren 1973: 23–24; Greenhut 1995: 35–38). temples of Khirbet ez-Zeiraqun does not affect their dating The pottery associated with these tombs, known from as argued by Finkelstein (2013: 1333). other places in northern Israel, includes wheel-made The three Megaron Temples (as well as the Khirbet gray vessels decorated with wavy white bands; this pot- ez-Zeiraqun temples) represent a crystalized ground-plan tery group has clear connections to northern Syria (e.g., characterized by an entrance porch with a portico between Amiran 1960: 209–15 [Family C]; Dever 1980: 37, 46–47 two antae, which leads to a broad-room sanctuary. This plan [Family NC]; Kenyon 1979: 133–38). Is it possible that is not typical of Canaan and apparently originated in north- these rock-cut tombs and their characteristic pottery ern Syria, where temples based on a similar—but not identi- represent the nomadic population who built the three cal—ground-plan, generally labeled “temples in antis,” are Megaron Temples on the summit of Tel Megiddo? known (Sala 2007: 190–201; Castel 2010). Some of these temples differ from those at Megiddo by having a long-room Stratum XIV/Level J-8: Cult Room rather than a broad-room sanctuary. Corinne Castel refers in Temple 4040 to temples at several sites: first and foremost, Tell el-Rawda, Tell Chuera, and Ebla/Tell Mardikh. Castel concluded that Stratum XIV of the Intermediate Bronze once again the temples of this type appear in northern Syria in EB IVA marks a radical change in the sacred area and its char-

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 99

Fig. 32. The rebuilt Megaron Temple 4040 and Round Altar 4017 of Stratum XIV/Level J-8, as published by Loud (1948: fig. 395). (Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago)

acter (Fig. 32; Loud 1948: 84, fig. 395). The summit of domestic structures. Megaron Temple 4040 continued the site was resettled and domestic structures covered in use, but it was drastically remodeled: a small cultic the entire area. Megaron Temples 5192 and 5269 as well room was built inside the sanctuary, facing the rebuilt as Gatehouse 3160 were buried beneath the newly built altar (Fig. 32). According to Loud, Round Altar 4017 was

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 100 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Table 2. The Six Stages of the Sacred Area during Strata XX–XIV/Levels J-1–J-8

Stage Period Stratum Level Cult Place Function First Neolithic–Chalcolithic–EB IA XX J-1 ? Sacred summit? Second EB IB XIX J-2 J-2 Temple Pilgrimage site J-3 Temple 4050 XVIII J-4 Great Temple Third EB II Gap Gap Abandoned site Fourth EB III XVII J-5 Round Altar Settlement site XVI J-6 Fifth Earlier Intermediate XV J-7 Megaron Temples; Pilgrimage site Bronze Round Altar Sixth Later Intermediate XIV J-8 Remodeled Temple 4040; Settlement site Bronze Round Altar

still in use in Stratum XIV; however, it was quite possi- continuity and consistency, on the one hand, as well as bly replaced in Stratum XIV by the superimposed Struc- drastic changes, on the other hand, in the sacred area and ture 4009—an altar or a bamah—attributed by Loud to its character. We can divide this long period into six dis- Stratum XIII (1948: fig. 396). It thus seems that during tinct stages, which are summarized in Table 2. the latter part of the Intermediate Bronze period, people settled in the sacred area on the summit, while one of First stage. Structural remains and pottery indicate the cultic structures, reduced in size and having a differ- that some settlement existed on the eastern slope, on ent character, continued to function. Significantly, Gate- the southeastern slope, and on the site to the east of the house 3160, which was meaningful when the sacred area mound. Installations on the summit support the notion of Stratum XV was a pilgrimage site, was not rebuilt or that the summit already served as a cultic area during the remodeled in Stratum XIV when the cultic area was in- early periods. In this respect, it resembles the summits of corporated in a settlement. other Early Bronze settlements built on hills which be- Significantly, a bronze fenestrated ax was found em- came their cultic centers. bedded in the rebuilt wall of Temple 4040 (Loud 1948: pl. 182:3; Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 174). Two similar Second stage. Three temples were successively built axes were found in Intermediate Bronze tombs, one on the at the edge of the summit during EB IB. It seems that all eastern slope and the other one in Kibbutz Maʿabarot (Guy three faced the slope on which extended a large court- 1938: fig. 173:5; pl. 163:8; Gophna 1969). The ax, probably yard. The courtyard of the earliest temple, dated to Stra- a foundation deposit, indicates that Megaron 4040 was re- tum XIX/Level J-2, included the Picture Pavement. This modeled during the Intermediate Bronze period. temple was nearly completely removed when the Stratum With the remodeling of Megaron Temple 4040 in XIX/Level J-3 Temple 4050 was built at this place. In due Stratum XIV/Level J-8, our survey of the Early Bronze course, Temple 4050 was replaced by the Great Temple. cultic precinct on the summit of Tel Megiddo comes to During this period of intensive religious, cultic activ- an end. By that time, settlement on the mound was well ity, the summit behind the temples remained an open established, and from then on it continued to develop and ground—a sacred area—where various cultic activities prosper until the end of the Persian period in Stratum I. took place. It seems that the highest point of the summit, As in Stratum XIV, cultic activity continued here at least where the Round Altar was later built, was the focus of until the end of Stratum VI. This continuing cultic activ- the cultic activities. ity was centered in the area where the Round Altar had The three EB IB temples show much resemblance to stood before, thus continuing the cultic tradition focused one another in their architecture and setting. Signifi- on this very place since ancient times. cantly, they also resemble the Chalcolithic-Ghassulian Temple at En-Gedi. As in En-Gedi, the sacred area at Summary and Conclusions Megiddo in EB IB became a center for pilgrimage serving the settlement nearby, other settlements in the region, I have surveyed above the complex history of the sa- and possibly nomadic tribes from far away. cred area on the summit of Tel Megiddo during Strata XX–XIV/Levels J-1–J-8, which had lasted three mil- Third stage. The cultic precinct and the settlement east lennia or more. During this long period of time, we see of the site were apparently abandoned during EB II. This

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 101 is associated with the drastic changes that occurred at the gatehouse with two entrances, one for entering and one for end of EB I in the Jezreel Valley in the region of Megiddo. exiting, was built on the slope. The temples as well show Naturally, some activity could have continued during the affinities to the north. It seems that once again, as in the EB EB II on the summit of the tell. The fact that the Round IB, the sacred area at Megiddo became a center for pilgrim- Altar was built at the highest point in EB III shows that age, serving the nomadic tribes in the region. For unknown the traditions associated with the sacred summit were not reasons, the cultic compound was deserted, possibly when forgotten during the period of abandonment. the nomadic tribes who built and used it moved on.

Fourth stage. EB III was a period of great prosperity in Sixth stage (the later part of the Intermediate Bronze Megiddo. It can be assumed that the site, or a large por- period). The sacred summit saw the continuation of cultic tion of it, was now settled. The acropolis of the settlement traditions together with drastic changes. The Round Al- extended onto the summit and its surroundings. The tar continued in use, forming the focus of the sacred area. slope to its east was terraced, and a palatial building, pos- Two Megaron Temples were discarded, while the third, sibly the ruler’s palace, was built there. Other buildings Temple 4040, was remodeled and continued to serve as a of secular nature, both public and domestic, extended shrine. Most important, the area of the summit was now across the summit. The sacred traditions and cultic activ- densely settled, and domestic buildings extended above ities were now limited to the highest point of the sum- the two abandoned temples and the gatehouse of the cul- mit, obviously the traditional focus of cultic activities at tic compound. Instead of a cultic compound entered by a this place, where the Round Altar was erected. Sacrificial monumental gate which served as a pilgrimage site, the activities took place here. A temple was not built nearby, summit was turned into a settlement with a small shrine but we cannot rule out the possibility that one was situ- and a round altar in its midst. ated to the south of Area BB. The end of EB III saw the The unique sacred area at Megiddo has now been destruction or abandonment of the EB III acropolis at thoroughly investigated by two archaeological expedi- Megiddo, except for the Round Altar. tions. However, the fieldwork is far from complete. In order to fully understand the history and character of Fifth stage (the earlier part of the Intermediate Bronze this unique site, more fieldwork is needed. Three subjects period). The EB III settlement at Megiddo reached its end, require future investigation: (1) The area to the south of and the site proper was apparently abandoned. The region Area BB. Digging here will reveal the southern end of was now settled by nomadic tribes, whose rock-cut tombs the sacred summit, as well as the southern edge of the were uncovered on the southeastern slope. The architecture Level J-2 and J-3 temples. (2) Further study of the Great of the tombs and the pottery show affinities to the north. Temple. More digging beyond the edge of Area BB will On the summit of Megiddo, the Round Altar survived the properly expose the facade of the temple, the theoretical change from the EB III settlement and continued to func- courtyard in front of it, and the side wall of the building. tion. A large cultic compound, which included the three (3) Further digging on the summit proper might give a Megaron Temples and the Round Altar, was built here. A better idea of this area during Levels J-1, J-2, and J-3.

Acknowledgments

I am indebted to the anonymous reviewers, who led me to Hermann Genz, and Prof. Pierre de Miroschedji, respectively. introduce various changes which considerably improved this ar- The plan in Figure 21 is reproduced with the kind permission ticle. The illustrations in Figures 5–6, 9, 11–13, 20, 25–29, and 32 of the Israel Exploration Society. The plans and photographs in are reproduced with the kind permission of the Oriental Institute Figures 1, 7–8, 10, 14–19, 22–24, 30–31 are reproduced with the of the University of Chicago. The photographs in Figures 16–19, kind permission of the Megiddo Expedition, The Institute of Ar- 23–24, and 30 are by Pavel Shrago. The plans in Figures 2–4 are chaeology, Tel-Aviv University. The labels in the various figures reproduced by the kind permission of Prof. Zeʾev Herzog, Prof. were added by me.

References

Adams, M. J. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and E. H. Cline. Mono- 2013a Part III: The Main Sector of Area J. Pp. 47–118 in graph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler In- Megiddo V: The 2004–2008 Seasons, Vol. 1, ed. I. stitute of Archaeology 31. Tel Aviv: Emery and

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 102 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute Dever, W. G. of Archaeology,­ Tel Aviv University. 1980 New Vistas on the EB IV (“MB I”) Horizon in Syria- 2013b The Early Bronze Age Pottery from Area J. Pp. 295– Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Orien- 334 in Megiddo V: The 2004–2008 Seasons, Vol. 2, tal Research 237: 35–64. ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and E. H. Cline. Dothan, M. Monograph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler 1958 Some Problems of the Stratigraphy in Megiddo XX. Institute of Archaeology 31. Tel Aviv: Emery and Eretz-Israel 5: 38–40 (Hebrew). Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute Dunayevsky, I., and Kempinski, A. of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. 1973 The Megiddo Temples. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Adams, M. J.; David, J.; Homsher, R. S.; and Cohen, M. E. Palästina-Vereins 89: 161–87. 2014 The Rise of a Complex Society: New Evidence from Engberg, R. M., and Shipton, G. M. Tel Megiddo East in the Late Fourth Millennium. 1934 Notes on the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pot- Near Eastern Archaeology 77: 32–43. tery of Megiddo. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civi- Adams, M. J.; Finkelstein, I.; and Ussishkin, D. lization 10. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2014 The Great Temple of Early Bronze I Megiddo. Epstein, C. American Journal of Archaeology 118: 285–305. 1973 The Sacred Area at Megiddo in Stratum XIX. Eretz- Amiran, R. Israel 11: 54–57 (Hebrew). 1960 The Pottery of the Middle Bronze Age I in Palestine. Esse, D. L. Israel Exploration Journal 10: 204–25. 1991 Subsistence, Trade, and Social Change in Early Arav, R. Bronze Age Palestine. Studies in Ancient Oriental 2014 The Chalcolithic Temple in Ein Gedi—Some An- Civilization 50. Chicago: University of Chicago thropological Considerations: An Appendix to Press. Ussishkin’s Article. Near Eastern Archaeology 77: Finkelstein, I. 27–31. 2013 Archaeological and Historical Conclusions. Pp. Beck, P. 1329–40 in Megiddo V: The 2004–2008 Seasons, Vol. 2002 Issues in the Art of Early Bronze Age Palestine. 3, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and E. H. Cline. Pp. 19–57 in Imagery and Representation: Stud- Monograph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler ies in the Art and Iconography of Ancient Pal- Institute of Archaeology 31. Tel Aviv: Emery and estine; Collected Articles, ed. P. Beck. Edited by Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute N. Naʾaman, U. Zevulun, and I. Ziffer. Tel Aviv, of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Finkelstein, I.; Halpern, B.; Lehmann, G.; and Niemann, Aviv University Occasional Publications 3. Tel H. M. Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications in 2006 The Megiddo Hinterland Project. Pp. 705–76 in ­Archaeology. Megiddo IV: The 1998–2002 Seasons, Vol. 2, ed. I. Ben-Tor, A. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. Mono- 1973 Plans of Dwellings and Temples in Early Bronze graph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler In- Age Palestine. Eretz-Israel 11: 92–98 (Hebrew). stitute of Archaeology 24. Tel Aviv: Emery and Brandfon, F. R. Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute 1977 The Earliest City Wall at Megiddo. Tel Aviv 4: 79–84. of Archaeology,­ Tel Aviv University. Braun, E. Finkelstein, I., and Ussishkin, D. 2014 Early Megiddo on the East Slope (The “Megiddo 2000a Area J. Pp. 25–74 in Megiddo III: The 1992–1996 Stages”): A Report on the Early Occupation of the Seasons, Vol. 1, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and East Slope of Megiddo; Results of the Oriental In- B. Halpern. Monograph Series of the Institute of stitute’s Excavations, 1925–1933. Oriental Institute Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 18. Tel Aviv: Publications 139. Chicago: University of Chicago Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology. Press. 2000b Archaeological and Historical Conclusions. Pp. Callaway, J. A. 576–605 in Megiddo III: The 1992–1996 Seasons, 1965 The 1964 ʿAi (Et-Tell) Excavations. Bulletin of the Vol. 2, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Hal- American Schools of Oriental Research 178: 13–40. pern. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archae- Castel, C. ology of Tel Aviv University 18. Tel Aviv: Emery 2010 The First Temples in antis: The Sanctuary of Tell Al- and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology. Rawda in the Context of 3rd Millennium Syria. Pp. 2003 The Cache of Egyptianized Vessels from Megiddo: 123–64 in Kulturlandschaft Syrien: Zentrum und A Stratigraphical Update. Tel Aviv 30: 27–41. Peripherie; Festschrift für Jan-Waalke Meyer, ed. J. Finkelstein, I.; Ussishkin, D.; and Halpern, B. Becker, R. Hempelmann, and E. Rehm. Alter Orient 2006 Archaeological and Historical Conclusions. Pp. und Altes Testament 371. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. 843–59 in Megiddo IV: The 1998–2002 Seasons,

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2015 THE SACRED AREA OF EARLY BRONZE MEGIDDO 103

Vol. 2, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Hal- Ibrahim, M. M., and Douglas, K. pern. Monograph Series of the Sonia and Marco 2004 The Early Bronze Age Town of Khirbet ez-Zeraqon: Nadler Institute of Archaeology 24. Tel Aviv: Em- Excavations, Preservation and Site Management. ery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Pp. 367–81 in First International Conference on Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. ­Science and Technology in Archaeology and Con- Finkelstein, I.; Ussishkin, D.; and Peersmann, J. servation 12–17 August, 2002, Jordan, ed. T. S. 2006 Area J (The 1998–2000 Seasons). Pp. 29–53 in Akasheh. Granada: Fundación el Legado Andalusí. ­Megiddo IV: The 1998–2002 Seasons, Vol. 1, ed. Ilan, O., and Goren, Y. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. Mono- 2003 The Egyptianized Pottery Vessels of Early Bronze graph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler In- Age Megiddo. Tel Aviv 30: 42–53. stitute of Archaeology 24. Tel Aviv: Emery and Joffe, A. H. Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute 2000 The Early Bronze Age Pottery from Area J. Pp. of Archaeology,­ Tel Aviv University. 161–85 in Megiddo III: The 1992–1996 Seasons, Vol. Friesem, D., and Shahack-Gross, R. 1, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. 2013 Analyses of Sediments from the Level J-4 Temple Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology Floor. Pp. 143–47 in Megiddo V: The 2004–2008 of Tel Aviv University 18. Tel Aviv: Emery and Seasons, Vol. 1, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology. E. H. Cline. Monograph Series of the Sonia and Keinan, A. Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology 31. Tel Aviv: 2007 The Megiddo Picture Pavement: Evidence for Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Egyptian Presence in Northern Israel during Early Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Bronze Age I. M.A. thesis, Tel Aviv University Genz, H. ­(Hebrew). 2002 Die frühbronzezeitliche Keramik von Ḫirbet ez- 2013 Sub-Area Lower J. Pp. 28–46 in Megiddo V: The Zeraqōn mit Studien zur Chronologie und funktio- 2004–2008 Seasons, Vol. 1, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Us- nalem Deutung frühbronzezeitlicher Keramik in der sishkin, and E. H. Cline. Monograph Series of the südlichen Levante. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeol- Palästina-Vereins 27/2; Deutsch-jordanische Aus- ogy 31. Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publica- grabungen in Ḫirbet ez-Zeraqōn 1984–1994, End- tions in Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology, Tel berichte 5. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Aviv University. Gophna, R. Kempinski, A. 1969 A Middle Bronze Age I Tomb with Fenestrated Axe 1972 The Sin Temple at Khafaje and the En-Gedi Temple. at Maʿabarot. Israel Exploration Journal 19: 174–77. Israel Exploration Journal 22: 10–15. Goren, Y. 1989 Megiddo: A City-State and Royal Centre in North 2000 Technology, Provenience and Interpretation of the Israel. Materialien zur allgemeinen und verglei- Early Bronze Age Egyptian Ceramics. Pp. 496–501 chenden Archäologie 40. Munich: Beck. in Megiddo III: The 1992–1996 Seasons, Vol. 2, ed. Kenyon, K. M. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. Mono- 1958 Some Notes on the Early and Middle Bronze Age graph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Strata of Megiddo. Eretz-Israel 5: 51*–60*. Aviv University 18. Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass 1979 Archaeology in the Holy Land. 4th ed. London: Publications in Archaeology. Benn. Greenberg, R. Loud, G. 2003 Early Bronze Age Megiddo and Bet Shean: Discon- 1948 Megiddo II: Seasons of 1935–39. Oriental Institute tinuous Settlement in Sociopolitical Context. Jour- Publications 62. Chicago: University of Chicago nal of Mediterranean Archaeology 16: 17–32. Press. Greenhut, Z. Marco, S.; Agnon, A.; Finkelstein, I.; and Ussishkin, D. 1995 EB IV Tombs and Burials in Palestine. Tel Aviv 22: 2006 Megiddo Earthquakes. Pp. 568–75 in Megiddo IV: 3–46. The 1998–2002 Seasons, Vol. 2, ed. I. Finkelstein, Guy, P. L. O. D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. Monograph Series of 1938 Megiddo Tombs. Oriental Institute Publications 33. the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeol- Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ogy 24. Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publica- Herzog, Z. tions in Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology, Tel 1997 Archaeology of the City: Urban Planning in Ancient Aviv University. Israel and Its Social Implications. Monograph Series Marquet-Krause, J. of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv Univer- 1949 Les fouilles de ʿAy (Et-Tell), 1933–1935. 2 vols. sity 13. Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publica- Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 45. Paris: tions in Archaeology. Geuthner.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 104 DAVID USSISHKIN BASOR 373

Mazar, A. Shipton, G. M. 1990 Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000–586 1939 Notes on the Megiddo Pottery of Strata VI–XX. Stud- b.c.e. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: ies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 17. Chicago: Doubleday. University of Chicago Press. de Miroschedji, P. Ussishkin, D. 1997 Tel Yarmut, 1996. Israel Exploration Journal 47: 1980 The Ghassulian Shrine at En-Gedi. Tel Aviv 7: 1–44. 127–36. 2013 Comments on the Early Bronze Cultic Compound, 1998 Tel Yarmut, 1997. Israel Exploration Journal 48: 1992–2010. Pp. 1317–28 in Megiddo V: The 2004– 136–44. 2008 Seasons, Vol. 3, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, 2001 Notes on Early Bronze Age Metrology and the Birth and E. H. Cline. Monograph Series of the Sonia and of Architecture in Ancient Palestine. Pp. 465–91 in Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology 31. Tel Aviv: Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighbor- Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, ing Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse, ed. S. R. Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Wolff. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 59; 2014 The Chalcolithic Temple in Ein Gedi: Fifty Years American Schools of Oriental Research Books 5. after Its Discovery. Near Eastern Archaeology 77: Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 15–26. Morinis, A. van der Steen, E. J. 1991 Introduction: The Territory of the Anthropology of 2001 Megiddo in the Early Bronze Age. Bibliotheca Ori- Pilgrimage. Pp. 1–28 in Sacred Journeys: The An- entalis 58: 303–11. thropology of Pilgrimage, ed. A. Morinis. Westport, 2005 The Sanctuaries of Early Bronze IB Megiddo: CT: Greenwood. ­Evidence of a Tribal Polity? American Journal of Nigro, L. Archaeology 109: 1–20. 2010 Tell es-Sultan/Jericho in the Early Bronze II (3000– Wapnish, P., and Hesse, B. 2700 bc): The Rise of an Early Palestinian City; 2000 Mammal Remains from the Early Bronze Sacred A Synthesis of the Results of Four Archaeological Compound. Pp. 429–62 in Megiddo III: The 1992– Expeditions­ . Rome “La Sapienza” Studies on the 1996 Seasons, Vol. 2, ed. I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, Archaeology of Palestine & Transjordan 5. Rome: and B. Halpern. Monograph Series of the Institute University of Rome “La Sapienza.” of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 18. Tel Aviv: Oren, E. D. Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology. 1973 The Early Bronze IV Period in Northern Palestine Yekutieli, Y. and Its Cultural and Chronological Setting. Bulletin 2008 Symbols in Action—The Megiddo Graffiti Re­ of the American Schools of Oriental Research 210: assessed. Pp. 807–37 in Egypt at Its Origins 2: Pro- 20–37. ceedings of an International Conference “Origins of Sala, M. the State: Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt,” 2007 L’architettura sacra della Palestina nell ’età del Bronzo Toulousse (France), 5th–8th September 2005, ed. antico I–III: Contesto archeologico, analisi architet- B. Midant-Reynes and Y. Tristant. Leuven: Peeters. tonica e sviluppo storico. Contributi e materiali di archeologia orientale 13. Rome: University of Rome “La Sapienza.” Sebbane, M. 2009 The Mace in Israel and the Ancient Near East from the Ninth Millennium to the First. Ph.D. disserta- tion, Tel Aviv University.

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Sacred Area of Early Bronze Megiddo: History and Interpretation Author(s): David Ussishkin Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, (-Not available-), pp. 69-104 Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5615/bullamerschoorie.373.0069 . Accessed: 15/04/2015 13:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 71.163.53.12 on Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:09:35 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions